'Uncertain pay': P43B for gov't salaries, benefits moved to unprogrammed funds in 2026

MANILA, Philippines — Rep. Antonio Tinio (ACT Teachers Party-list) flagged the bicameral conference committee’s decision to create a new line item in the unprogrammed appropriations worth P43.24 billion.  

The new line item, labeled “For Payment of Personnel Services Requirements,” was not included in either the House or Senate versions of the 2026 General Appropriations Bill (GAB). It only appeared in the bicam report. 

Tinio, however, noticed that the new line item was allocated the exact amount the bicam committee had slashed from salary upgrades, retirement and terminal leave benefits.

A total of P10.77 billion was removed from the Miscellaneous Personnel Benefits Fund’s (MPBF) line item for staffing modifications and salary upgrades, while P32.47 billion was cut from the Pension and Gratuity Fund for retirement and terminal leave payments.

“This is a brutal betrayal of our civil servants,” Tinio said in a statement Friday, January 2.

What these funds are for

According to the Department of Budget and Management, the MPBF covers gaps in salaries, bonuses, allowances and related costs for government employees. It also funds the filling of vacant positions or the creation of new ones, with teachers among the beneficiaries.

The Pension and Gratuity Fund, meanwhile, finances pensions and retirement benefits for government retirees, including military veterans, members of the Armed Forces of the Philippines, and uniformed personnel such as the Philippine National Police. 

Although the budget for these benefits appears restored, Tinio explained they are no longer part of the programmed appropriations. Being under the unprogrammed appropriations means they can only be funded if excess revenue becomes available.

Where did the P43 billion go?

Unprogrammed appropriations act as a standby fund for priority programs without allocated funds, which means they are not included in the P6.793 trillion 2026 budget.

Technically, the P43.24 billion was not realigned to unprogrammed funds. Instead, it was transferred and now relies on future excess revenue — budgeted in theory, but not guaranteed.

“From being guaranteed funding under the regular or programmed budget, it has become uncertain after being moved to the ‘standby’ or unprogrammed budget. In other words, paying for these benefits has become precarious,” Tinio said in Filipino.

He surmised that the P43.24 billion may have been realigned to possible “pork” for local government units, pointing to the increase in the Local Government Support Fund — which provides financial assistance to LGUs and their constituents — to P37.68 billion.

Tinio said the sudden reduction in personnel benefits is not unprecedented. In 2025, he said the Service Recognition Incentive, or SRI, failed to provide government employees, such as those from the Department of Education, the full P20,000 benefit due to funding constraints.

Such constraint, however, was allowed through DBM Budget Circular No. 2025-3, which sets the guidelines for its implementation, funding, and proration.

For Tinio, turning a portion of the personnel benefits budget into unprogrammed appropriations is essentially the government “gambling” with the salaries of government employees in 2026.

What can Marcos do?

Tinio alleged that the new line item could serve as a “shield” for President Bongbong Marcos to avoid vetoing the pork-like unprogrammed appropriations — whose removal many lawmakers and critics have been calling for, especially as flood control projects funded under the scheme were poorly built or not carried out at all.

Tinio, however, maintained that the P243 billion in unprogrammed appropriations should still be vetoed. 

To restore the P43.24 billion originally allocated for the salaries, benefits and pensions of government personnel, he said the executive should instead submit a supplemental budget at the earliest opportunity possible.

Marcos is set to act on the 2026 budget bill on January 5. He may sign it without vetoing any line items, sign it with vetoes, or leave it unsigned, which would leave this year with a reenacted budget riddled with the controversial allocations.